= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
drnickbone comments on Female Test Subject - Convince Me To Get Cryo - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (176)
Has anyone on Less Wrong considered (and answered) an anthropic objection to cryonics? It might go something like this:
"If cryonics works, then the society in which I am revived will be a transhuman/posthuman one with very advanced technology, and a very large number of observer moments. But if such societies existed in the universe, or ever came to exist, then I would expect to find myself already part of one, and I don't. (Note here the use of Bostrom's strong self-selection assumption or SSSA.) Therefore I should judge it unlikely that posthuman/transhuman societies exist or will come to exist. Therefore I should judge it unlikely that cryonics will work."
One counter-argument (which Bostrom himself might use) would be based on reference classes. Perhaps I'm currently in a limited reference class that precludes me being part of a transhuman/posthuman society. But this also has a dubious implication for cryonics, since for cryonics to work it must be possible for me to change that reference class, moving from a very small one to a much larger one. So again, wouldn't I expect to have already done that?
You should provide an argument as to why it would be more likely to be born into a post human society. For a post human society to exist, a human and pre-human world would probably, although perhaps not necessarily, have to exist first. Even if it is more common to exist in transhumance state, there would still be non-transhuman minds.
This is just an application of the "Self-Sampling Assumption" (or "principle of mediocrity").
There will be many more observer moments in a "post-human" society than a "pre-posthuman" one (at human level or lower), because the population is much larger and observers live longer. So if the universe contains both sorts of society, a typical observer (or observer moment) would be much more likely to be in a "post-human" society. If the universe only contains "pre-posthuman" societies (e.g. because societies self-destruct before reaching a post-human level of technology) then an observer would have to be in one of the "pre-posthuman" ones because there aren't any others.
I'd suggest you look at Nick Bostrom's web-site for more details, including his discussion on reference classes.
P.S. It is also possible to use the "Self-Indication Assumption" as an alternative to the "Self-Sampling Assumption". Or to use a non-anthropic model like "Full Non-Indexical Conditioning". But these don't get rid of the argument that we are unlikely to turn into a post-human society, and for some rather interesting reasons, which Katja Grace discusses here
So far, I think reference classes are the only counter-argument that might work.
I figured the reasoning behind that. I just thought it would be a good idea for you to post the explanation with your argument.
Ah, thanks!